Page 50 of 58 FirstFirst ... 404849505152 ... LastLast
Results 491 to 500 of 578

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Defense has caught up. Offense is stagnant.

  1. #491
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,285
    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    Hmm, for me I think the 3 star rate is one important thing to look at and it doesn’t matter too much to me if one of the reasons it is low is because it is so hard to accomplish that many players don’t try. Then, when I see the 3 star rates from the elite war leagues where they get 2 attacks, it still looks too low to me even with players going for 3 stars and even with well-known problems with cheating in those leagues.

    I don’t agree the 3 star rate and 1 star rate have to be the same. As long as they don’t happen so often that regular wars are regularly ending in ties, 3 stars are more fun than 2 stars to many of us (yes, even if that means more 3 stars against us). So, I’m fine if the 1 star rate decreases and the 3 star rate increases. I suspect the one star rate naturally would decrease if offense was given a boost or defense was given a nerf.
    They don't have to be the SAME, but they need to be balanced. A lot of this will be impacted by how much you want to move the 3* rate.

    Ideally, in order to make 3 star attempts in CWL viable...you'd want the 3* rate higher than the 1* rate (if the 1* rate is higher, it doesn't matter how high the 3* rate is...it's a poor strategic choice to try for 3* and you're effectively punishing those who do). So you want the 3* rate higher or equal to the 1* rate. The greater the disparity between the 2, the less strategy anyone has to employ in deciding whether a base should be hit with a 2* attack or a 3* attack.

    Buff offense too much in an effort to raise 3* rates, and you effectively eliminate 1* from consideration. There are 2 implications here:

    1. It means that 3 starring is easy enough that you can always secure the TH without worrying that it's going to have any real impact on your ability to 3* a target.

    2. It eliminates rewards for good decision-making by raising the rewards for bad decisions/unsuccessful attacks.

    I don't want to get to the point where it's essentially "just try for 3, there's really no penalty for being terrible because it's virtually impossible not to get at least 2". The 1* rate doesn't mean anyone is getting 3* any less often, and it doesn't necessarily mean people are attempting 3* any less often...it just means a bigger differentiation in reward between a successful 3* and a failed 1* (vs a failed being a 2*). I think decision-making is important...so as much as i don't want people saying "just get 2, it's the only smart decision" I also don't want people saying "just try for 3, even if you fail there's really no downside". There should be both upside and downside when attempting 3* attacks...and a middle of the road safe pick. As long as you make the 3* rate higher than the 1* rate, you still encourage people to try, and you still end up with more stars on average going for 3.

  2. #492
    Forum Veteran Shadrach777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,756
    Quote Originally Posted by dmoore1998 View Post
    If the rate is 10%, and you think 50% of people are trying. The true rate is 20%. If you think 40% are trying, it's 25%.
    This is a fallacious statement and should have never been stated. Only later do you bring up homogenous population, but we all know the population is not homogenous. To even claim these kind of numbers we would need to know the exact same people are attacking the exact same base designs with the exact same offensive troops. As Fear the Patty said, way too complex to put any simple math behind it.

    As iGroot stated earlier, if we see more people start to adopt designs that are extremely difficult to 3 star, we will see the 3 star rate drop further. To look at iGroot's picture, it might not tell the truth without further evidence that there were no 3 stars on the opposition's side (obviously they were 1 stars, but there could have been a 3 star to offset a 1 star); however, we cannot assume that no 3 star attempts were attempted by the opposition especially when one side got a 3 star. No one goes into the match thinking they are going to 2 star everything and win on %.

    People are claiming that not everyone is attempting the 3 star, and that's a valid claim. We cannot claim that if more people try for the 3 star we will see an increase in 3 star rates, for all we know the 2* rate might go down and the 1* rate might go up. One would hope the 3 star would increase if more people attempted it, but we can't know that for fact.

    I think the 10%rate is too low, but I am also basing that off the statistics I have provided for my own clan and opponents which shows we are running at less than 4% on regular wars. Unfortunately it's not a simple as cranking a knob and the overall % rate increases to 17% (random number pulled from the sky that is higher than 10%). SC just needs to start buffing offense (and nerfing tornado trap) here and there so we can start seeing numbers play out. It's unfortunate that SC decided to double nerf bats before we were able to collect any statistics on that.
    Last edited by Shadrach777; February 11th, 2019 at 09:43 PM.
    Location: USA
    TH12: 60/60/30 TH12: 60/60/30 TH12: 50/52/30 TH10: 30/30
    Main #LL2JCQ0C

  3. #493
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadrach777 View Post
    This is a fallacious statement and should have never been stated. Only later do you bring up homogenous population, but we all know the population is not homogenous. To even claim these kind of numbers we would need to know the exact same people are attacking the exact same base designs with the exact same offensive troops. As Fear the Patty said, way too complex to put any simple math behind it.

    As iGroot stated earlier, if we see more people start to adopt designs that are extremely difficult to 3 star, we will see the 3 star rate drop further. To look at iGroot's picture, it might not tell the truth without further evidence that there were no 3 stars on the opposition's side (obviously they were 1 stars, but there could have been a 3 star to offset a 1 star); however, we cannot assume that no 3 star attempts were attempted by the opposition especially when one side got a 3 star. No one goes into the match thinking they are going to 2 star everything and win on %.

    People are claiming that not everyone is attempting the 3 star, and that's a valid claim. We cannot claim that if more people try for the 3 star we will see an increase in 3 star rates, for all we know the 2* rate might go down and the 1* rate might go up. One would hope the 3 star would increase if more people attempted it, but we can't know that for fact.

    I think the 10%rate is too low, but I am also basing that off the statistics I have provided for my own clan and opponents which shows we are running at less than 4% on regular wars. Unfortunately it's not a simple as cranking a knob and the overall % rate increases to 17%. SC just needs to start buffing offense (and nerfing tornado trap) here and there so we can start seeing numbers play out. It's unfortunate that SC decided to double nerf bats before we were able to collect any statistics on that.
    If the population isn't homogeneous, then the 10% isn't meaningful for anyone, including people who want to use it to say the rate is too low. If you don't assume they are functionally the same level, that's fine...but then that makes the 10% figure as relevant as any random person telling us their own figure from their own wars and extrapolating that to the game.

    If you want to use the 10% in any way, shape, or form, you have to assume that the group where that data comes from is in fact 1 actual group that is alike enough so as to draw no meaningful differences...otherwise you're talking about multiple groups of varying skill levels...when the entire point of people using the 10% to say the rate is too low is "these are the best players in the game"...well not if we assume some of them are differentially worse.

    So you can definitely say they are not alike enough to be considered one group, but then you also have to abandon that 10% is the 3* rate of the best players in CWL...it's not...it's the 3-star rate of the best players plus some differentially worse players...absolutely meaningless. That's a fine statement as far as I'm concerned. That's not going to be what people relying on that same data to say the rate is too low are going to want though. It directly works to refute their argument. It provides that the rate would go up if they just got more skilled, because the data being provided is not "the best players in the game" if you believe the group to be different enough in skill to be statistically significant.

  4. #494
    Forum Veteran Shadrach777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,756
    Quote Originally Posted by dmoore1998 View Post
    My argument is that if you want to have an opinion "3* rates are too low" then that needs to be an opinion supported by other opinions.
    I stated 10% is too low on CWL 3 stars, that's my opinion.
    I stated my clan and opponents are hitting less than 4%, and since I am stating the 10% statistic is too low, then it's safe to assume my personal experience of less than 4% is another opinion that it's too low. Now it seems like you are contradicting yourself on what I am allowed to claim based on my opinions. Would you feel better if I stated first "that the 3 star rate, whatever it may be, is too low" and then said the 10% and less than 4% rates are too low?

    The 10% statistic is meaningful to me and supports my opinions that it is too low for my enjoyment. The population is not homogenous, which is why you can't perform simple math (my only argument against making your simple math claim earlier, which you agreed was okay for Tosti to do). However, the 10% statistic can be used subjectively to support my opinions.
    Location: USA
    TH12: 60/60/30 TH12: 60/60/30 TH12: 50/52/30 TH10: 30/30
    Main #LL2JCQ0C

  5. #495
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    63
    I went to visit a clan that is in champs 1 yesterday to get some advice. You know what they told me. They didnít use a single 3 star strat the entire cwl. They didnít get a single 3 star. Why? They know that 2 star attacks win cwl. So they only went for safe 2 star attacks. They came second in their group.
    Now you talk about cwl having a 3 star rate of 10%. This number is absolutely lower due to the large amount of people using 2 star strats.
    What people also donít understand is that if they slightly buff offence. Most people are going to be worse off. The greater population will barely see their 3 star rate increase. But the higher end players will see a much bigger increase. Bases wonít hold to the top players and people will be on here complaining defense needs a buff. Things now are better than the th11 max days when ferns rekt everything.
    I do believe the balance is really good now. 3 star attacks are hard and are celebrated when they happen as they should be. Poorly planned attacks and spam attacks arenít dominating like they were.. again a good thing.

  6. #496
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Realtruth View Post
    I went to visit a clan that is in champs 1 yesterday to get some advice. You know what they told me. They didnít use a single 3 star strat the entire cwl. They didnít get a single 3 star. Why? They know that 2 star attacks win cwl. So they only went for safe 2 star attacks. They came second in their group.
    Now you talk about cwl having a 3 star rate of 10%. This number is absolutely lower due to the large amount of people using 2 star strats.
    What people also donít understand is that if they slightly buff offence. Most people are going to be worse off. The greater population will barely see their 3 star rate increase. But the higher end players will see a much bigger increase. Bases wonít hold to the top players and people will be on here complaining defense needs a buff. Things now are better than the th11 max days when ferns rekt everything.
    I do believe the balance is really good now. 3 star attacks are hard and are celebrated when they happen as they should be. Poorly planned attacks and spam attacks arenít dominating like they were.. again a good thing.
    YOu missed one important item in what they told you. Yes, 2 star attacks win wars and the reason why is that it is too difficult/unreliable to attempt a three star right from the get go. Sounds pretty much that they have figured out that 3 stars are waaaay too hard too.
    Last edited by Tosti111; February 12th, 2019 at 12:09 AM.

  7. #497
    Quote Originally Posted by Realtruth View Post
    I went to visit a clan that is in champs 1 yesterday to get some advice. You know what they told me. They didnít use a single 3 star strat the entire cwl. They didnít get a single 3 star. Why? They know that 2 star attacks win cwl. So they only went for safe 2 star attacks. They came second in their group.
    Now you talk about cwl having a 3 star rate of 10%. This number is absolutely lower due to the large amount of people using 2 star strats.
    While this is true, you can see for yourself that outside of cwl, the 3 star rate isnít much better for these c1 clans. I canít speak for every clan but Iíve seen a lot more than just one.

    Also, 3 stars shouldnít be guaranteed for higher end players but they should be much, much easier for them. The balance of the game shouldnít depend on them, but on the average player.
    No average player is going to sit there and scout a base for an hour, practice a few dozen FCs a day, build 7 new bases a month, raid with 2 or 3 spotters on voice chat, etc.

  8. #498
    Forum Superstar twinblade123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,129
    Quote Originally Posted by iCanGoForYears View Post
    While this is true, you can see for yourself that outside of cwl, the 3 star rate isnít much better for these c1 clans. I canít speak for every clan but Iíve seen a lot more than just one.

    Also, 3 stars shouldnít be guaranteed for higher end players but they should be much, much easier for them. The balance of the game shouldnít depend on them, but on the average player.
    No average player is going to sit there and scout a base for an hour, practice a few dozen FCs a day, build 7 new bases a month, raid with 2 or 3 spotters on voice chat, etc.
    +1, what Iíve said for years

  9. #499
    Quote Originally Posted by Realtruth View Post
    I went to visit a clan that is in champs 1 yesterday to get some advice. You know what they told me. They didn’t use a single 3 star strat the entire cwl. They didn’t get a single 3 star. Why? They know that 2 star attacks win cwl. So they only went for safe 2 star attacks. They came second in their group.
    Now you talk about cwl having a 3 star rate of 10%. This number is absolutely lower due to the large amount of people using 2 star strats.
    What people also don’t understand is that if they slightly buff offence. Most people are going to be worse off. The greater population will barely see their 3 star rate increase. But the higher end players will see a much bigger increase. Bases won’t hold to the top players and people will be on here complaining defense needs a buff. Things now are better than the th11 max days when ferns rekt everything.
    I do believe the balance is really good now. 3 star attacks are hard and are celebrated when they happen as they should be. Poorly planned attacks and spam attacks aren’t dominating like they were.. again a good thing.
    And why do 2 stars win the war? Because defense is too strong to those of us who have more fun with 3 stars than 2 stars.

    If you don't like the 3 star % from the SC CWL then use the private war league figures, then knock them back a bit for possible unfair play, then consider they are the most elite attackers and consider then what the average max th12 player does.
    Contact SC here. Click here to see how trophies are calculated. Main clouds thread here. My tips/thoughts on Legends here. My suggested legends changes found here. Although now I expect we will just wait for project blue skies. Fingers crossed.

  10. #500
    Quote Originally Posted by dmoore1998 View Post
    To your point about taking the TH out early...I've tried to be consistent about using phrases like "best 3* attack". A player going for the TH first, and then hoping to 3* later might be practicing good decision-making...but in the end it's really a 2-star attempt (or at minimum, if done to lessen the risk, it's not their best 3* attempt). EVERYONE who goes for 2 is obviously hoping it turns into 3. The question really is "If only a 3-star attack counted, how would you hit it"...if you then hit it in any other way you're really compromising the attempt at 3* of your own choosing...which might be a very good idea to do, but we can hardly then categorize that as a real 3* attempt (again, any more than any other attack, we all want 3* to happen to use when we attack if we can have it, even if we use a basic 2* strategy...I've never heard anyone complain that their 2* turned into 3* and they're mad).
    I get your logic of risk and reward, but 1 star rate doesn't help in this. As I explained in my other post,
    https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...3#post12090453
    since th12 is a defense itself, so even the best 3star attempt goes to take it out early. Any 3star hit I have seen have always gone for the townhall early. It is not bcz they are going for safe 2 star to turn it into a 3star, it is because th is also a defense, and an important defense, which should be accounted for early for getting the 3stars.
    Generally the 1 star fails, I have seen are not the best 3star attempts but attacks like bowitch done opposite to th so that WW gets value. They may be thinking they are doing a 3star attempt but it is not the case. We know bowitch's spam attack, and won't work against good bases. Any strategical 3star attack at th12 generally takes out th in the 1st phase of attack, either with sui heroes or ks, or in the beginning of 2nd phase, i.e with their main troops. But it is not bcz they are going for safe 2, it is mainly bcz th is a beast defense.

    But I agree with your statement of champs 1 population not being homogeneous, bcz there may be some attackers who are not 3star specialists, more like 2stars attackers and getting carried with other 3star attackers in the clan.
    Imo, if someone is telling people are falling fir easy strats instead of using strategical 3star attacks, it is probably bcz they are giving the same 2stars results as their highly planned attacks bcz less effort is needed. So, that may be a problem. So lol, I can advise them not to fall for easy strats and continue their planned hits, bcz they have the chance of 3star too, but really there's no need to advise them, bcz I think they know this and are trying for 3stars too

    Yeah, there should be risk reward factor, but I don't think any strategical hit at th12 risks getting 1star unless they fail miserably. Bcz since th is also a defense, so planned attacks account for giga too.
    Edit: At th11 and below, townhall is treated as a storage while trying for 3stars, so there's more risk of 1star fails. But at th12, since Giga is such a major defense, so 3star attempts generally plan for it, so lesser risk of 1star.
    Last edited by BlazeStormz123; February 12th, 2019 at 04:10 PM.
    Never Give Up Without Even Trying!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •